Bug 295334 - Add some way to tag a face result as "ignore this one" in database for future scans
Summary: Add some way to tag a face result as "ignore this one" in database for future...
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: digikam
Classification: Applications
Component: Database-Faces (show other bugs)
Version: 3.5.0
Platform: Compiled Sources Linux
: NOR wishlist
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Digikam Developers
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2012-03-04 19:02 UTC by Frederic Grelot
Modified: 2021-08-25 14:30 UTC (History)
7 users (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In: 7.4.0


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Frederic Grelot 2012-03-04 19:02:57 UTC
I regularly relaunch a full face scan on my library (in order to ensure that all my pictures have been correctly searched, which is not always the case), but my problem is that the face detection plugin detects quite often "things" that may look like faces (clouds, fireplace, drawings on clothes or on walls...), as well as faces of unkwown people that happen to appear on my pictures.
A truly very good option would be, in those cases, to have (instead of the "remove tag button") an option to ignore the result, so that it would not be proposed on the next scan.
Currently, for that purpose, I create two tags : "Nobody" and "Other people", the first one being for misdetections, and the second one for the people I don't want to name.

A solution would be to record the tag information in the database, but not in the image (since it would then appear as a tag in any other software I may use), and to filter the result based on that information.

Thanks if this function appears someday!

Frédéric.
Comment 1 Marcel Wiesweg 2012-03-04 20:43:01 UTC
I am tempted to say "Why not use the option to rescan only unscanned pictures" but I see some sense in that wish assuming a new algorithm became available, or you changed search settings.
Comment 2 Frederic Grelot 2012-03-04 20:50:16 UTC
Yep, that is one case to consider (I don't know is the algorithm still evolves, but I think that I see some new faces from time to time), together with the case where, due to some bugs (like https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=281792 for example), some faces are lost.
Since I still regularly experience bugs with face recognition (and you must notice it : everytime I decide to tag my new photos in my collection, few bugs arise...), I still prefer to run the full search occasionnaly...
Comment 3 caulier.gilles 2014-08-24 11:25:42 UTC
On the top right corner of face thumb, there is a button to reject face with the tooltip "This is not a face, click to reject it".

This button do not solve your problem ?

Please test with last digiKam 4.2.0.

Thanks in advance

Gilles Caulier
Comment 4 caulier.gilles 2014-09-05 09:35:59 UTC
Marcel,

"Face Rejection overlay" is not the purpose to "Ignore this face" feature ?

Gilles
Comment 5 Marcel Wiesweg 2014-09-05 17:43:10 UTC
Well it deletes the face, I believe the post is about storing the information that this face shall be ignored when rescanning in the future. Which is not implemented.
Comment 6 Jens 2015-12-18 09:13:56 UTC
+1 from my side too. I want to be able to ignore (for all future face scans)

- faces that I do not want to be recognized (eg. complete strangers which only appear on one photo anyway)
- stuff that is not a face or animal faces that are accidentally recognized.

I also would like to be able to search pictures that have these flags set (e.g. "images with ignored faces").

Thank you!
Comment 7 jflemer 2016-10-03 03:46:06 UTC
I'm willing to work on this issue given minimal direction from core developers.
Comment 8 jflemer 2016-10-12 04:41:34 UTC
To implement this feature, I think that "ignored" faces will have to be retained as Identities in the `Identities` table. To mark as ignored, we could either use the `IdentityAttributes` or possibly use the `Identities.type`.  However `Identities.type` is completely unused at the moment, and is not mapped through the `Identity` class.

Given the current code, and the user story of wanting to "search for images with ignored faces", I think using an attribute (in the `IdentityAttributes` table) would be the preferred way of persisting ignored status.  Any disagreement or alternate ideas before I begin implementing?
Comment 9 caulier.gilles 2016-10-12 19:37:51 UTC
yes, IdentityAttributes sound like a good candidate to implement this feature. No objection from me.

Gilles Caulier
Comment 10 Maik Qualmann 2020-01-02 07:54:33 UTC
*** Bug 415783 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 11 MarcP 2020-01-09 16:04:23 UTC
Bug 392023 is most likely a duplicate as well.

I think the best option, as the original poster suggested, would be to create two categories: One for "Ignored" faces, and another one for "Deleted". 

The first one for people that I might not know who they are, so I can hide them from my results in the "Unknown" category, and revisit it later if I have more info, and the "Deleted" for things that are not faces, so digikam does not scan them again next time (the red X button on the top right of each face would send them to "deleted").
Comment 12 Maik Qualmann 2020-03-12 06:40:26 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 392023 ***
Comment 13 caulier.gilles 2021-08-25 14:30:14 UTC
Fixed with #392023